Eveliina Tammela

Finnish Broadcasting Company – Appeal in a defamation case dismissed by the Monegasque Supreme Court

We successfully advised the Finnish Broadcasting Company, Yleisradio Oy, and its Editor in Chief in a defamation case before all levels of the Monegasque judiciary. The case concerned four articles published by Yleisradio in 2022, two of which were in Finnish and two in English. The counterparty was of the opinion that the claims made in the articles violated his honour and brought defamation charges against Yleisradio and its Editor in Chief in Monegasque courts. In addition, he claimed damages totalling EUR 100,000 and demanded the removal of all allegedly defamatory content under penalty of a fine. We challenged the jurisdiction of the Monegasque courts in the matter, as the articles were not directed at a Monegasque audience and, contrary to what the counterparty claimed, jurisdiction could not be based solely on the fact that the articles were published in English on the internet where they were available for all and could be translated into French using a browser functionality. Furthermore, we presented comprehensive arguments stating that the facts presented in the articles were truthful, presented in good faith as required by Monegasque legislation, and based on thorough research. We also highlighted that the counterparty’s actions constituted so-called forum shopping, i.e. the desire to have the case heard in a court he believed would be most favourable to him. The claim was heard by all three levels of Monegasque courts, as the counterparty appealed the judgments of the lower courts. The courts of first and second instance had deemed that the Yleisradio articles in question were not directed at a Monegasque audience, and the Monegasque courts were therefore not competent to hear the case. The Supreme Court of Monaco (Cour de Révision) stated that there were no grounds to link the allegedly defamatory claims to the country. Even though it was possible to access the online articles from Monaco as well, this did not mean that the articles were published in Monaco. This being the case, the Supreme Court of Monaco deemed that the local courts did not have jurisdiction to rule on the case and dismissed the counterparty’s appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision. The Supreme Court’s decision is fundamental in upholding the freedom of expression in Europe. The opposite outcome would have encouraged similar intimidation lawsuits in countries favourable to the plaintiff, with the purpose of restricting dialogue and silencing critical voices. The unpredictability of judicial power and the risk of extensive – and expensive – trials could create an atmosphere of fear and increase self-censorship of those exercising their freedom of expression, especially journalists, other media professionals and researchers. The decision also reinforces the principle that forum shopping is not allowed. The Supreme Court’s decision is final.

17.6.2025

City of Rovaniemi – Former employees ordered to pay damages in an investment decision matter

We successfully acted for the City of Rovaniemi in a matter concerning offence in public office and damages claims in relation to a significant investment decision made by the city. The defendants were the city’s former municipal corporate officer, who was in an employment relationship, and a city treasurer, who was in a public-service employment relationship and acted as the supervisor of the municipal corporate officer. The criminal matter related to the City Board’s decision to invest EUR 2 million of the city’s funds in bonds offered by a newly established investment company in accordance with a decision prepared by the defendants. A significant part of the company’s operations involved quick loan business. The main legal question in the matter was whether the investment of public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and whether regulation on offences in public office therefore becomes applicable even to a person in an employment relationship. The municipal corporate officer in an employment relationship was charged with aggravated abuse of public office based on her negligence in the preparation and presentation of the investment decision as well as based on a conflict of interest due to the fact that she had invested her own money in a company that received funding from the investment target presented to the City Board. The charges of an offence in public office against the city treasurer concerned his position as the supervisor and reporter of the city’s investment activities. He was also involved in the preparation and presentation of the City Board’s decision. The processing of the matter started in the District Court of Lapland in June 2022. In its judgment given in August 2022, the District Court stated, based among other things on our argumentation, that the investment of public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and that regulation on offences in public office can therefore be applied to the municipal corporate officer. The District Court deemed that the conduct of the former municipal corporate officer fulfils the characteristics of abuse of public office and that the conduct of the former city treasurer fulfils the characteristics of violation of official duty with respect to the preparation of the investment decision, but the right to bring charges had become time-barred. Punishments could therefore not be imposed on the defendants, but the defendants were ordered to jointly and severally pay the city approximately EUR 114,000 in damages plus interest for late payment. The city treasurer’s share of the amount was 10%. The prosecutor accepted the judgment but the other parties appealed it to the Court of Appeal. Acting for the city, we pursued claims for both punishment and damages in the Court of Appeal. The Rovaniemi Court of Appeal processed the matter in November and December 2023. In its judgment given in June 2024, the Court of Appeal upheld the District Court’s judgment with respect to the abuse of public office and violation of official duty. The Court of Appeal deemed that the municipal corporate officer had failed in her duty to declare the conflict of interest. In addition, she had failed in her duty to ensure that the prepared decision was in compliance with the city’s investment guidelines and that it had been properly put out to tender. The Court of Appeal also found that the text of the investment proposal was insufficient and misleading and that the municipal corporate officer’s conduct was intentional. As regards the city treasurer, the Court of Appeal held that he had failed in his duty to ensure that the investment proposal to the City Board complied with the investment guidelines, that the presentation was not misleading and that risks were taken into account as required by the investment guidelines. With the judgement, the Court of Appeal took a clear position that abuse in public offices and when exercising public authority is not acceptable. The judgment is also significant as it declares that investing public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and that the liability for acts in office therefore becomes applicable even to persons in employment relationships. In addition, a key question for the Court of Appeal to assess was defining the amount of economic damage in a matter related to investment activities. The Court of Appeal held based on our arguments that the conduct of the municipal corporate officer and the city treasurer had caused damage to the city. The Court of Appeal increased the amount of damages to EUR 210,000 with the city treasurer’s share limited to 10%. The amount was increased because the Court of Appeal deemed that the city had suffered damage not only in terms of the loss of capital but also in terms of the loss of estimated return on investment. The judgement is not final.

21.8.2024

Finnish industrial company – Decision to waive prosecution for an occupational safety and health offence

We assisted a major Finnish industrial company and two employees of its safety organisation in criminal proceedings concerning an occupational safety and health offence. The accident occurred at a common workplace where several other employers were also operating at the time of the incident. During the criminal investigation, the police suspected, among other things, two employees of the company of having committed an occupational safety and health offence. The police also investigated the company’s criminal liability. We examined the safety practices applied in the company and the common workplace, and the roles of the companies and individuals involved in the incident. We justifiably argued that our clients had acted diligently with respect to their duties. The prosecutor concluded that there were no grounds to prosecute our clients, so the prosecutor decided not to press charges against the company and its two employees.

6.8.2024

Finnish construction company – Decision to waive prosecution in an occupational safety and health offence matter

We represented a prominent Finnish construction company that was involved in an occupational safety and health offence matter. The company was the project supervisor and main contractor in a joint building site where a workplace accident occurred. The criminal investigation examined the personal criminal liability of the site manager employed by the company and the criminal liability of the company. We investigated and analysed the course of events, the actions of the parties concerned and the company’s occupational safety and health practices. In the final statement we argued that the company and site manager had complied with all occupational safety and health regulations. Based on our arguments, the prosecutor deemed that there were no likely causes to support the suspected offence, decided not to prosecute the employee of the company and waived the corporate fine claim against the company.

3.6.2024

Finnish professor – Criminal investigation in a suspected offence in public office concerning direct procurement was discontinued

We successfully advised a Finnish professor in a wide investigation of an offence in public office concerning direct procurement in the social services and healthcare sector. Upon the proposal of the head investigator, the prosecutor decided to discontinue the criminal investigation with respect to our client.

17.11.2023

Finnish industrial company – Decision to waive prosecution for an occupational safety and health offence

We assisted a Finnish industrial company in a criminal investigation concerning an occupational safety and health offence and negligent infliction of bodily injury. Based on the arguments we presented in the final statement, the prosecutor decided not to prosecute the CEO of the company and waived the corporate fine claim against the company.

16.11.2023

Finnish industrial company – Corruption investigation

We assisted a Finnish industrial company in an internal investigation related to suspected corruption. We carried out the internal investigation in the matter and advised the client throughout the investigation process. At the end of the investigation process, we drew up the final report with recommendations for actions. In Finland, corruption and bribery crime regulation is being developed to enable intervening in inappropriate actions more effectively. As the regulation becomes more detailed, the number of investigations relating to suspected corruption is expected to grow in Finland. Companies should ensure that their instructions are up-to-date and that an internal investigation will be started as soon as there is a reason to suspect corruption.

15.11.2023

Meyer Turku and Meyer Werft – Meyer shipyards awarded compensation and damages in a criminal case concerning copyright and trade secret infringement

We successfully acted for Meyer Turku Oy and Meyer Werft GmbH & Co. KG in an extensive criminal case, from the very beginning of the internal investigation to the court’s decision. The case centred around a person having made unauthorised copies of thousands of files containing Meyer-proprietary information and providing consulting services to a competing Chinese shipyard. The District Court handed down its judgement in October 2023, holding that the offender’s actions constituted criminal copyright and trade secret infringement as well as industrial espionage. The court furthermore held that the offender’s actions could be attributed to a limited liability company he had set up. The court ordered the company to pay Meyer EUR 5 million in compensation for the infringement and also awarded Meyer damages for its expenses. The court thus accepted Meyer’s claims in full. The matter is an exceptionally extensive and significant case on criminal trade secret and copyright infringement. Meyer Turku and Meyer Werft are among the largest and most modern shipyards in the world. Luxury cruise ships built by Meyer are internationally known for their cutting-edge technology and innovativeness. Outset In 2018, Meyer received indications that certain Meyer-proprietary files might have been copied from its systems unlawfully. An extensive internal investigation revealed that that a person had copied a significant number of files containing information protected under both copyright and trade secret laws. The offender had also set up a limited liability company and, in the summer of 2018, entered into a service agreement with a Chinese shipyard. Under the agreement, the offender was to provide consulting services relating to new innovation and technology to the Chinese shipyard. The offender and his company also received significant payments from the Chinese shipyard. After the internal investigation, a police report was filed in the late summer of 2018. In addition, the offender’s property was confiscated for security. Criminal charges were filed, and Meyer presented its claims for compensation and damages as a complainant. Results The District Court agreed with Meyer and the prosecution that the offender’s actions met all the elements of criminal copyright and trade secret infringement as well as of industrial espionage. The court held that the offender’s actions constituted infringement of Meyer’s copyrights and its neighbouring database and catalogue rights under the Finnish Copyright Act and that all the elements of criminal trade secret infringement and industrial espionage, as defined in Finnish law, were met. The court also held that the offender’s actions could be attributed to the limited liability company he had set up. The court ordered the company to pay Meyer EUR 5 million in compensation for the copyright and trade secret infringements. The court also awarded Meyer damages and legal costs as claimed. The court thus accepted Meyer’s claims in full. This decision is noteworthy for the protection of the European shipbuilding industry’s know-how in general. The judgement is final.

18.10.2023

Wellbeing services organisation – Representation in criminal proceedings

We successfully represented a Finnish wellbeing services organisation in a criminal matter where the defendant was a former employee of the organisation. The employee had fraudulently misrepresented their qualifications, gaining unlawful economic benefit and causing economic loss to the organisation. The employee was sentenced to conditional imprisonment for two separate offences and to pay damages to the organisation.

15.10.2023

Finnish Broadcasting Company – Defamation charges dismissed by a Monegasque Court

We successfully advised the Finnish Broadcasting Company, Yleisradio Oy, and its Editor in Chief in a defamation case before a Monegasque Court (Tribunal Correctionnel de la Principauté de Monaco). Based on our argumentation, the Court deemed that it did not have jurisdiction to rule on the case. The Court dismissed all charges and civil actions against the Finnish Broadcasting Company and the Editor in Chief.

30.6.2023

Finnish Listed Company – Criminal Proceedings Related to Nature Conservation Offence

We successfully represented a Finnish listed company in the criminal proceedings related to a nature conservation case, where the accused was an employee of the company. The District Court dismissed the charges of a nature conservation offence holding that the employee had not, intentionally or through gross negligence, unlawfully destroyed or impaired a natural area protected by the Nature Conservation Act. The judgment has gained legal force, so the District Court decision is final.

19.8.2021

Construction Company – Suspected Occupational Health and Safety Offence and Corporate Fine Investigation

We represented a major Finnish construction company in an occupational health and safety offence matter, which concerned an occupational accident at one of the company’s sites. The police carried out an extensive pre-trial investigation in 2020. We assisted the company’s management and employees in numerous interviews and we filed the key evidence and final statement in the case to the prosecutor. The prosecutor decided not to pursue charges against any of the company’s employees and dropped the claim for a corporate fine against the company.

22.6.2021

Titanium – Acquisition of Investium Companies

We advised Titanium Oyj in a transaction in which it will acquire all the shares in Investium Group Ltd’s subsidiaries. The purchase price will be paid predominantly with Titanium’s shares, and the completion of the transaction is conditional upon, among others, approvals from the Finnish Financial Supervisory Authority and Titanium’s extraordinary general meeting. Investium Companies’ operations include Investium funds, securities brokerage, investment advice, insurance agent operations, life and non-life insurance brokerage and a legal services. In 2017, the turnover of Investium Companies amounted to approximately EUR 4.6 million and the result of the financial period to approximately EUR 0.2 million. Titanium is a growth company focusing on special investment funds investing in care properties and housing and asset management services. Titanium’s turnover in 2017 amounted to EUR 10.2 million and profit excluding group goodwill amortisations to EUR 6.1 million. Titanium’s shares are admitted to trading on the First North Finland trading facility maintained by Nasdaq Helsinki.

20.6.2018

Silvadata and Its Shareholders – Sale of Silvadata to Trimble Group

We represented Silvadata Oy and its 64 shareholders in the sale of the company to the US-based technology group Trimble Inc. and its Finnish subsidiary Trimble Finland Oy. The largest shareholder of the company before the transaction was The Central Union of Agricultural Producers and Forest Owners (MTK). In the transaction, Trimble acquired 100% of the shares in the company. Silvadata provides enterprise applications and services for the private forest management industry. The company was founded in 1985. The Silvadata portfolio addresses private forest management, wood trading and financial systems. In addition, training, consulting, hosting and support services are provided for customers. Trimble is a global positioning technology corporation, headquartered in Silicon Valley, California. Trimble has almost 10,000 employees in 35 countries. Trimble’s portfolio includes over 1,100 patents. Though best known for GPS technology, Trimble integrates a wide range of positioning technologies including GPS, laser, optical and inertial technologies with application software, wireless communications, and services to provide complete commercial solutions. Its integrated solutions allow customers to collect, manage and analyse complex information faster and easier, making them more productive, efficient and profitable. Trimble products are used in more than 150 countries around the world.

7.3.2017

AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc. (AMC) – Acquisition of Nordic Cinema Group (NCG)

As Finnish legal counsel we have advised NYSE-listed AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., on its acquisition of Scandinavian and Baltic cinema operator Nordic Cinema Group (NCG), for approximately USD 900 million from Bridgepoint Capital and Swedish media group Bonnier Holdings. NCG operates 68 theatres and has a substantial minority interest in another 50 associated theatres to which NCG provides a variety of shared services. NCG’s theatres are number one in market share in Sweden (SF Bio), Finland (Finnkino), Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (Forum Cinemas) and number two in Norway (SF Kino). The combination of AMC and NCG will further strengthen AMC’s current position as the largest cinema operator in the United States, Europe and the world. The project was led by Swedish law firm Lindahl and international law firm Pinsent Masons. Advokatfirmaet Schjødt (Norway) and Sorainen (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) acted as the other local counsel. ‘For the third time in the past twelve months, we believe we have discovered a substantial acquisition that gives AMC yet another opportunity to further expand and diversify our geographic reach and more firmly establish AMC as the undisputed leader in movie exhibition worldwide,’ says AMC CEO and President Adam Aron.

25.1.2017

My latest blogs

Latest references

Get to know our other experts in the field

Search from the site.